for some odd reason, natty had put pretty in pink in our netflix queue and it arrived yesterday…and thus we watched it. of all the hughes films-and more importantly the 80’s hughes film genre, i think this is the most overrated. oh sure the soundtrack is good and all, but the character development is lame, and it’s the least effective use of the “artistic poor kid that wants the rich kid which breaks the heart of the sincere and loyal fellow poor kid” plot line.
it’s weird, b/c i always thought this was the perfect archetype of all that. I dunno, i find myself comparing it to some kind of wonderful, and –i never thought i’d say this— i like SKOW more.. i know it’s odd.
jesus, i sound like wawa.
anyway what happened to john huges anyway….looking at his last 10 years, and 10 releases on IMDB–he’s just lost it…did you know that they are on beethoven 5–you know with the big dog…and home alone 4? john john john…come on now. you once where the voice of a generation. you painted a reflection of high school social structure that was soo true, that where it wasn’t true, real life changed to adopt your vision….
because of you, i wanted cheerleaders that weren’t even that hot, simply because i was a loser and they were cheerleaders…that’s how it worked in the hughsian universe. i tried to make a woman with my computer just last week, and it didn’t work, but still, i thought of you…shouldn’t you be writting movies about those high schoolers, but with them 20 years older…have they (we…me) just become ‘regular adults’, is there nothing particular or unique about the 80’s generation–now that it is no longer the 80’s? high school in the 80’s was different than any other epoch of highschool life…should not the corresponding adulthood of those people also be unique-? do all generations just merge into one lane after the exit at 30 years old–and then cruise at the same speed toward the nursing home? john…john? don’t leave us now that we really need you….
19 responses so far ↓
1 B // Feb 7, 2004 at 6:52 pm
Thank you very much for pointing out this atrocious decline in Mr. Hughes’ career. I always thought ‘Pretty in Pink’ was dull and overrated. But if you want to enjoy one of his better early bopper works, try ‘Sixteen Candles.’ It’s surprisingly good, even though it is evidently an attempt to be ‘Fast Times at Ridgemont High.’ It doesn’t matter. Mr. Hughes made up for it with ‘Ferris Bueller.’
Nonetheless, Hughes does have more going for him than just adolescent insight. This is the man who gave us ‘Trains, Planes and Automobiles,’ and the entire Lampoon vacation trilogy with Chevy Chase. This transcends zit angst.
As for calling upon him to help us in our thirties, do you not realise that he always had this ability? This is the writer of ‘Mr. Mom’ we are talking about here!
2 rcg // Feb 7, 2004 at 10:08 pm
As I see it, and I could be wrong, we have Hughes to thank for Bill Paxton.
But really, why should Hughes have evolved, or matured?
We haven’t.
3 Co-Worker Don // Feb 8, 2004 at 10:34 am
shouldn’t you be writting movies about those high schoolers, but with them 20 years older…have they (we…me) just become ‘regular adults’
Isn’t that like every episode of Friends or other similar show? Thankfully that’s goign off the air this year!
4 jefke // Feb 8, 2004 at 7:26 pm
yeah i dunno, i mean, he did do “she’s having a baby” which i suppose is about ‘growing up’…i dunno, just trying to get a weekend post out. it’s harder than you’d think.
5 wawa // Feb 8, 2004 at 9:53 pm
I think what happened to Hughes was that he became a recluse after his mother died (he was very close to her, I guess . . . probably in that Norman Bates way). Anyways, after this reclusive period, following Home Alone, I think, he got stuck for good ideas.
Underrated: Uncle Buck
Overrated: Everything else.
Jon Cryer rocks
6 Jenni // Feb 8, 2004 at 11:29 pm
We watched Fast Times this weekend, and I was telling Don, I don’t think you could make that movie today. Showing people who are meant to be teens nude, or getting it on with nudity - I can’t think of a recent movie that shows intended high school nudity. American Pie’s Nadia was older, I think. And the cavalier attitude toward Stacy’s abortion - I think that would get a heck of a lot of reaction these days. Maybe it did then and I have forgotten. I dunno. I just don’t think a studio would put that movie out today.
7 Natty // Feb 8, 2004 at 11:38 pm
Wawa, I’m all with you on the Uncle Buck thing. I do not underrate Uncle Buck- I LOVE that movie! Ask Jefke. Looky here, there’s something that we agree on. Here’s a quarter. Now go downtown and have a rat gnaw that thing off your face!
8 B // Feb 9, 2004 at 9:45 am
Jenni’s comments made me think of the 1995 movie ‘Kids.’ That movie is not only filled with teen nudity, it’s an all-out orgy. Plus it’s jam packed full of other contentious delights, such as drugs, AIDS and rape. The main male character, if I remember right, takes pride in deviriginizing unwilling girls…
The difference, I believe, is not the content of the two movies, but the intended audience. ‘Kids’ was never meant to be a show actually for kids. ‘Fast Times,’ however, was supposed to be. Yet Jenni is right to note that this movie features a rather casual abortion that, today, would raise a hellstorm. There have always been polemical movies. Jenni’s comment is interesting because it reveals that what is considered unacceptable for a teen audience has actually changed a great deal over a very short time.
P.S. Uncle Buck rulez! Naked ass bears!
9 Wawa // Feb 9, 2004 at 9:54 am
Whoa, whoa, whoa . . . is this a serious movie discussion?
You can’t compare Kids with Fast Times. Tottally unfair fight. Kids was suppossed to be a serious movie with a serious message, while Fast Times baked in the message into a teen farce. You can’t even compare Fast Times with American Pie, because, other then losing your virginity, that movie was basically all about friendship, camrarderie, and having a good time. We haven’t seen a movie of comedy mixed with serious teen issues done as well as Fast Times in a long, long time. That movie was groundbreaking ane still stands the test of time.
and we saw Phoebe Cates naked.
10 Wawa // Feb 9, 2004 at 9:57 am
and Brendan, I just noted something: You compared Sixteen Candles with Fast Time?????
1) No nudity
2) No abortion
3) It was crappy
No comparison.
11 B // Feb 9, 2004 at 2:16 pm
Wawa, Wawa, Wawa… You should pay more attention when reading.
(1) I did not compare ‘Fast Times’ to ‘Kids.’ I distinguished them. I was responding to Jenni’s comment: that a studio today would not release a “movie that shows intended high school nudity.” ‘Kids’ is such a movie. However, not wanting anyone to think I was actually comparing the two films - anyone else get confused? - I immediately made sure to point out the difference between them. I said each movie has a different “intended audience.” You said one movie has a serious message, the other is a “teen farce.” This is the same difference. Same diff.
I was trying to suggest that Jenni was half-right: they do make films with nude teens, they just don’t allow teens to watch them anymore. It’s all about nipples.
(2) I didn’t “compare” ‘Sixteen Candles’ with ‘Fast Times.’ I said that ‘Sixteen Candles’ is a movie that really, desperately, achingly, miserably wanted to be ‘Fast Times,’ but could never have even come close. I did say, however, that it is “surprisingly good.” One surprise is the very young John Cusack, who was simply born to play a loveable geek.
Try to keep up, Wawa, please.
12 Natty // Feb 9, 2004 at 2:31 pm
Speaking of teen nudity, jefke and I watched “Y Tu mama Tambien” last night. Lots of sex, teenage nudity, all that good stuff. Just thought I’d throw that into the whole mess you’ve got going here. I do think I liked Uncle Buck better, though. Also, Amy Heckerling is the one who did Fast Times. her other great success was Clueless- very different sort of teen movie, I suppose.
13 Wawa // Feb 9, 2004 at 2:56 pm
Well, this is the thing, B, is that I don’t see Sixteen Candles trying to be anything other then just the first Sixteen Candles. First off, it’s focused on just the main girl (Molly Ringwald) and the handsome stud (er . ..Jake) trying to find each other. Then you have Fast Times at Ridgemont, which was a bunch of different stories going on at one time. I don’t see how Hughes is trying to recreate Fast Times . . . with Sixteen Candles.
BTW-My list is damn good. Yes, I realize She’s Having a Baby is a very controversial choice, but just watch the scene where she’s having the child, and it’s all melodramatic. It’s so sappy it’s beautiful.
14 jefke // Feb 9, 2004 at 3:07 pm
whoa, a fast times converstation with no refernces to Dazed and Confused?..interesting. here we have the elements of the highschool party lifestyle…and yet some of the tension of clique-i-ness, social structures, bully-ism (clint the super dominant male monkey in a 50’s greaser uniform). though they were a bit shy on the nudity. well and of course there was the very serious dilemma of going to get aerosmith tickets or signing the football waiver thing. ….
nevertheless.
15 Wawa // Feb 9, 2004 at 3:26 pm
I would compare American Pie to Dazed and Confused in terms of the same sort of themes: The Partying, getting laid, etc . . . Only main difference was the era, and obviously, the pot smoking, which surprisingly, did not make an appearance in American Pie.
16 B // Feb 9, 2004 at 5:35 pm
‘16 Candles’ is a wannabe ‘Fast Times’ with a third of the imagination and double the sap. ‘16′ was mainly about Molly and her love interests, but that’s the sappy bit. You seem to have forgotten about the adventures of Farmer Ted, who gets a good amount of screen time too, and the exploits of his sidekicks, who get separated from him and have their own sub-sub-plot. That’s at least three stories, not one. Now I realise that ‘Fast’ had way more going on, but that’s why it had more imagination. Plus: its main story is just like ‘16,’ involving a young girl’s indecision in love (the rich/handsome jock or the geek?). ‘Fast’ kicks ‘16′ ass sideways cuz the chick is sexy juicy little J.J. Leigh.
Why am I bothering? Wawa doesn’t even think Chevy Chase is funny!
17 wawa // Feb 10, 2004 at 12:33 am
I think I was being a little harsh on Chevy Chase. Fletch, Spies Like Us and the National Lampoons movies is a fine enough legacy for one man.
18 jefke // Feb 10, 2004 at 8:44 am
man spys like us, brilliant–totally underrated, much maligned, but simple, innocent, great. and donna dixon…raaowwha and that russian chick…
19 Wawa // Feb 10, 2004 at 9:22 am
Much maligned? I don’t know anyone who doesn’t love that movie:
“I was going to get you the Disney Channel . . . for Freeee . .. but you can forget about it now!”
Ok, ya know what, that movie was great.